i was shocked to learn dr. zacharias studied with the jws and why he never became a jw, it was the jws incompetence that lead to dr. zacharias leading a different path in life.
he's one of the best speakers and logicians in my opinion, he's got two phds and works with extraordinary men and women willing to speak at any university or mormon temple because the word he uses is based off the word.
how come the governing body are afraid to attend q/as at yale, cambridge, oxford, ucla, harvard, rutgers ect..??
Ravi often takes liberties with reality. While he has quite a powerful speaking style, his logic is a joke and he often distorts texts and passages to his desire for a specific meaning.
He's an average Christian apologist using bad logic, out of context quotes and distorting reality to emotionally manipulate his audience. He just happens to be an excellent orator as well.
for many christians, the bible is viewed as the 100% error-free, perfect book straight from god, where every single word was carefully chosen by god for a reason.
but, usually, when you have a discussion on the topic, these christians will end up saying that only the original copies written directly from the hands of the prophets and apostles were error-free, and all manuscript copies since then are subject to copyist mistakes and other errors.. since zero original copies are in existence, how do we know the originals were error-free?
why should we think the originals should be error-free to begin with?
You cut and and paste after learning something new from me. Learn to think correctly.
Right. You can't prove that you aren't currently in a long distance relationship with a sheep you met online, so we can conclude that you are, using your logic.
I look at a black man in the eyes and he can see in my eyes and face that I am looking at another man same as me. But I notice that when many other white men talk to black men the sincerity is not there.
Way to judge people without knowing anything. But then, that is the Christian way.
There truly is no racism in the JW.
Absolutely there is.
for many christians, the bible is viewed as the 100% error-free, perfect book straight from god, where every single word was carefully chosen by god for a reason.
but, usually, when you have a discussion on the topic, these christians will end up saying that only the original copies written directly from the hands of the prophets and apostles were error-free, and all manuscript copies since then are subject to copyist mistakes and other errors.. since zero original copies are in existence, how do we know the originals were error-free?
why should we think the originals should be error-free to begin with?
Yes he does. I mean yes she does. I mean Viv, eh I mean I.... no Cofty does... I do
Damn I have forgotten who I am.
Just look down. Are we wearing sensible loafers or or wickedly delicious heels? Easiest way to tell who we are at the moment, dear.
my wife has a friend at her kh.
she is 37 and her friend is 88. i know it sounds kind of strange but they are both the wives of ubm so they kind of stick together.
my wife is very sincere in this friendship and this lady is a nice person.
Has anyone here lost their entire heritance to the WTS.
None of this is your inheritance or any of your business.
Believe it or not, it’s not really about the money.
for many christians, the bible is viewed as the 100% error-free, perfect book straight from god, where every single word was carefully chosen by god for a reason.
but, usually, when you have a discussion on the topic, these christians will end up saying that only the original copies written directly from the hands of the prophets and apostles were error-free, and all manuscript copies since then are subject to copyist mistakes and other errors.. since zero original copies are in existence, how do we know the originals were error-free?
why should we think the originals should be error-free to begin with?
You said nothing about Vivian's remarks about me in all of her posts, calling me "pro-rape"
You are. You promote Biblical morality.
I have not dictated to you or to anyone else on this thread what morality to choose. There is a difference between morality and profanity. Look in a good dictionary.
Right. Good point. Morals can be good, bad or otherwise. To be profane is to specifically treat something considered sacred with disrespect or indifference.
So, interestingly, since Biblical morality is pro-rape, taking a position against rape is profane.
for many christians, the bible is viewed as the 100% error-free, perfect book straight from god, where every single word was carefully chosen by god for a reason.
but, usually, when you have a discussion on the topic, these christians will end up saying that only the original copies written directly from the hands of the prophets and apostles were error-free, and all manuscript copies since then are subject to copyist mistakes and other errors.. since zero original copies are in existence, how do we know the originals were error-free?
why should we think the originals should be error-free to begin with?
It's nothing more than a deputy type of question. It sounds deep and interesting but it's nothing, which is all they have.
They're pro-rape and, since i've got no of otherwise, they have a thing for sheep. That's literally the level of their thinking. They've got nothing else.
the latest controversy over the confederate flag just sums up to me the state of dysfunction that exists in american society.. in summary: a white supremacist nutter shoots 9 black people dead in a church.
he's clearly inspired by the messages of others which the confederate flag is often a symbol of.. it seems like a no-brainer to remove it.
not only isn't it removed, it isn't even lowered at all as a mark of respect.. and of course now there are the people who want to defend their right to have it.
It's a part of USA history.
So is slavery.
Denying history and dictating what people can and cannot do (including something as innocuous as owning and/or displaying the Confederate flag) is what the Watchtower does.
Who is saying to deny history? Why do you think it does no harm?
If it's doing no harm, then it's doing no harm.
Oh, look, a tautology.
for many christians, the bible is viewed as the 100% error-free, perfect book straight from god, where every single word was carefully chosen by god for a reason.
but, usually, when you have a discussion on the topic, these christians will end up saying that only the original copies written directly from the hands of the prophets and apostles were error-free, and all manuscript copies since then are subject to copyist mistakes and other errors.. since zero original copies are in existence, how do we know the originals were error-free?
why should we think the originals should be error-free to begin with?
I'm assuming 'shear' is a metaphor (please, please, please be a metaphor).
for many christians, the bible is viewed as the 100% error-free, perfect book straight from god, where every single word was carefully chosen by god for a reason.
but, usually, when you have a discussion on the topic, these christians will end up saying that only the original copies written directly from the hands of the prophets and apostles were error-free, and all manuscript copies since then are subject to copyist mistakes and other errors.. since zero original copies are in existence, how do we know the originals were error-free?
why should we think the originals should be error-free to begin with?
Isn't the whole idea or rule of "burden of proof" equally as much man-made as atheists claim the Bible is?
No matter what the answer to that is, I wonder why you think that matters?
As a for instance, do you think I should be able to take out an ad in the newspaper, write books and articles, go on TV and claim tat Fusion Theism is sexually attracted to animals, once paid a farmer dress him up like a sheep and shear him and drunkenly killed a woman in 1999?
Are you OK with people making those claims without proof?
Why should I follow YOUR man-made rules instead of any other man-made rules?
No one said you should. Which rules are you against? More importantly, why are you against them? Is it because of the sheep thing you were caught doing?
for many christians, the bible is viewed as the 100% error-free, perfect book straight from god, where every single word was carefully chosen by god for a reason.
but, usually, when you have a discussion on the topic, these christians will end up saying that only the original copies written directly from the hands of the prophets and apostles were error-free, and all manuscript copies since then are subject to copyist mistakes and other errors.. since zero original copies are in existence, how do we know the originals were error-free?
why should we think the originals should be error-free to begin with?
And what does that have to do with with my statement that if the Bible is inspired, you are accountable to God with your conduct?
You're so adorable. You endorse a pro-rape and pro-slavery moral code, bring it up in a discussion about whether or not the Bible inspired, suggest I am fake account, suggest I am mentally unbalanced, attempt to dismiss me because of gender and now want me to make your point for you.
Good for you But stop remarking about me then and stick to the subject.
Oh my. Dear, you aren't man enough to tell me what to do. Besides, you're the one that brought feelings into it like some teenage girl with a crush. I can't make you stop or explain why you felt that was important to bring up.
When you figure out what your point was regarding accountability to god for not endorsing rape (as you do) on a thread about the inspiration of the Bible, let me know. Asking me is a waste of time since I can't read your mind.
